GER politics thread

[Jimbuna]

^ It would appear someone is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[Skybird]

Merkel may not be so much a lame duck, but a stealth duck now attacking below radar's horizon.

https://translate.google.de/translat...309&edit-text=

Me too thinks she will maximise the damages of her reign in the time she still has.

[Jimbuna]

Angela Merkel: Germany's shrewd political survivor

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c8.../angela-merkel

[STEED]

I hear Merkel has moved into the bunker!

Time to get worried.

[Skybird]

Three things I never have forgotten about her:


She comes form a family of a protestant clergyman who led his family from the relative freedom of Westgermany back into the socialist GDR. Voluntarily. The protestant church'S relation to the regime was none fof ame and no busioenss it could be proud of. Questionable and dubious, at best.


Merkel was in the youth oirganisaiton of the SED state party, the FdJ (Freie deutsche Jugend). So far, so good, every young boy and girlwas, if they wnated to not ruin their future chances to be allowe dto study and become academics or make a career otherwise, by Eastgerman standards. Pure opportunism, only few dared to resist, and paid for that. But Merkel did not just board the trian everybody wa sriding on - she made career in the FdJ and made it to the ranks of a chief secretary of the FdJ for agitation and propaganda, responsible for the universities and the academy of science. She was not even a fully grown up girl back then, anbd already had arranged herself with the regime and set the m akr needed to make potlicla career inside the regime.


As a teenage girl, she participated in the spying on and guarding of profiled dissidents and regime critics, another action that the oridnary opportunistic FdJ member did not end up in, only convinced, trusted, regime-loyal people. Havelmann is the most prominent case to be named here.



This socialisation must have left traces in her maturing and mind and thinking. And it show, it shows so very clearly. A merciless lack of principles to not allow any princple ever come in her way. A Machivellian understanding for playing the claviature of power. An instinct-driven talent for talking content-free propaganda babble. An aim for socialist political goals: under her reign, the CDU has turned into the SPD, and what was the CDU before her now is territory claimed by he Green who became a bit more conservative. Merkel is the personification of the term "opportunism".



In Merkel and her understanding of "Europe", there is more of the old Eastgerman GDR tyranny and its mentality, then there ever was about freedom, modenr dmeoctracy, and the heritage of the - now dead - old CDU principles and values. Pure opportunism of hers. And a poltical self-undersdtanding that mirrors that of the old party grandees in the SED and the heads of ther GDR state.


There is an old bitter joke about her, expesially known in Eastgerman federal states: Merkel is the executioner of Erich Honnecker's late revenge against the FRG. This descritpion fits her perfectly. No other political survivors of the old Warsaw Pact regimes that collapsed in the late 80s, was as successful in hiding their real nature and making a new career, like her. And all of Germany and all of Europe believed her showact - and still do.



My antipathy against her roots much deeper than most of you people here can imagine. I do not exaggerate when I said in the past that to me she is the worst political desaster in Germany's history since 1933 and the 12 dark years following that year.


-----


Interesting it will be what the AfD now does. Merkel was their prime argument: "Merkel must go", that was the slogan that kept the AfD going. Now that Merkel is almost "gone", at least off the radar screen, what 'S next for the AfD?

[Jimbuna]

^ Then why until recent times has she been so popular with the German electorate?

[Skybird]

Many people do not know what I said. A book describing it already years ago, simply dissappeared from the market, a second book got silenced down, practically dissappeared mysteriously as well. What remaisn to be rarely reprted can be labelled as conpiracy theory and rant from such obscure wbsites lablled as "racist" or whatever. The chancellor's office has cleaned internal file databases and library sources systematically of hints for her past.

And she tells the Germans what they want to hear. That we are social, good, mean it well, and most important: that things will stay as good as they are and big mummy will care for everybody and everything. She has taken the germans out of the rough world, and put them into stasis, so to speak. She deleted "change" and "other world" from the vocabulary, instead created a cocoon inside which there is emotional coziness that feels warm and close - and silently suffocates everybody not agreeing with her terminology. All political rivals that could endanger her seat at the party's top, have been mobbed away, were complimented out, got disposed in distant Brussels, were frustrated until they left voluntarily. What was left was just a club of claqueurs - uncritical, uniform, perfect parrots.



Finally she hijacked every political theme and argument of the opposition if that was something that the opposition could score with voters. That way, the other parties, especially the SPD and FDP, got almost consumed and digested and were left with no characteristical themes of theirs: whatever theme you wanted to see being taken care of: the party to go to with it was now the CDU alone. At least that was what the CDU claimed under Merkel. The public of course noticed and perceived it like this , state TV did its part in spreading the propaganda and new way of speaking, and so taking Merkel as leader became the natural thing to do.


"Mutti" is not for no reason her nickname over here.


If that verb would exist: to massive (somebody to death) - Merkel would be an example where it would be well-used to describe her method of wiping out opposition to her. A giant massive omnipresence that occupies everybody'S thinking and by its shere massive existence prevents other things and other people from breathing, moving, objecting...

[Catfish]

While Skybird's rants contain some truth, there are hundreds of decisions that are/were not negative, or bad. It always depends on the point of view. But as we all here do, Skybird picks out some bad ones and only comments on those, since ranting is much more fun. But i really can't bear the cant of how bad it all is, the sky will fall, a.s.o. anymore, it's becoming boring.


While i also think that Merkel should go, i do not think that all her decisons were bad, not even 10 percent. Experts even today say that the opening of the borders in 2015 were not a bad idea. Regarding international law and humanitarian concerns it was the only thing to do. That nationalists and xenophobes oppose that – who would have thunk?
I wonder what the right wing agenda will be when they cannot beat the dead horse of hostility towards foreigners anymore.

I take it that some just need a war and their life being diretcly threatened, nothing to eat, no perspectives, having to flee from a war perpetrated on their land by countries far away, to recognize that they do not really have it bad at all now, here, and today. Not compared to other times (read: the past), nor to certain other countries.
Wailing and whining on a very high level of personal freedom and property.

[Skybird]

Germany shall be held accountable for some more hundreds of billions of foul credits in the Eurozone:

https://translate.google.de/translat...tml&edit-text=

For comparison: Germany GDP in 2017 was 3.2 trillion Euros.

The Target-2 Saldi are not even mentioned in the article. More hundreds of billions lost.

[Skybird]

Again this ^ drivel?

Originally Posted by Catfish

While Skybird's rants contain some truth, there are hundreds of decisions that are/were not negative, or bad. It always depends on the point of view. But as we all here do, Skybird picks out some bad ones and only comments on those, since ranting is much more fun. But i really can't bear the cant of how bad it all is, the sky will fall, a.s.o. anymore, it's becoming boring.

We all know from what political direction you are coming from, even if you deny it: not the fineprint on the poster but the music makes the concert, and that puts your comments into perspective.

While i also think that Merkel should go, i do not think that all her decisons were bad, not even 10 percent. Experts even today say that the opening of the borders in 2015 were not a bad idea.

"Experts"...? Save me. There have been "experts" claiming right the opposite, btw.

Regarding international law and humanitarian concerns it was the only thing to do.

Wrong on both accounts. Plus the constitution unconditionally obligates any government, no matter the party, to protect German borders. Nobody had the guts to claim repsonsibility for this decisiopon, for the German public at that time would have crucified any cabinet member doing so. And has Merkel not m ade it a motto now that emotions and sentiments shall trump law and order and treaties? Well, she has for sure.



You just want that foreigners from other continents have any right for the fruits of Germans' labour without having ever contributed to it themselves, and most of these strangers never will contribute in net effect to it, but will take more from the social system than they pay back into it. We will pay dearly for this self-delusion. It will be a heavy bill. A very heavy bill, in money, and in further destruction of Germany'S cultura and social fundaments. The left will have big and loud parties in the rubble.

That nationalists and xenophobes oppose that – who would have thunk?
I wonder what the right wing agenda will be when they cannot beat the dead horse of hostility towards foreigners anymore.

Yes, for lefties like you everybody opposing the expropriation of German wealth and private property, and opposing the politically correct rejecton of Germans having first right over their own land, is a nationalist and xenophobe. An islamophobe and a paranoid. A Nazi and a racist. A mentally derranged and soul-sick nuthead who must be cured. Or burned, socially assassinated and silenced. Jaddajaddajadda...

I take it that some just need a war and their life being diretcly threatened, nothing to eat, no perspectives, having to flee from a war perpetrated on their land by countries far away, to recognize that they do not really have it bad at all now, here, and today. Not compared to other times (read: the past), nor to certain other countries.
Wailing and whining on a very high level of personal freedom and property.

How many millions do you want to take in, catfish? 40 millions? 60 millions? More? Can all be done, there is that immense demand to migrate into the promised lands of Europe for sure, especially Germany. "We can afford it".



The now debated UN migration "pact" has dynamite in it that the TV state media desperately try to hide since long: it claims that every migration-willing man has a "human right" to freely choose where he wants to live. But I doubt that refugees from the war in Jemen will just be satisfied with living in Egypt or Somalia if they get told they have a claim for Germany instead. And what now gets forumalted as a test ballon and thus in form of "non-bionding" declarations, will be turned into treaty and law soon in the gfuture - it make sno sense to decvlare non-binding rules if you have ni intetion whatever to turn them into bidnign rules.



Nopbody can have a right whatsoever to force and press himself into an existing community of established members and demand that them now have to get along with him and have to integrate him, no matter whwether they want him or not. Because that would be a violation of profound human rights of the mebers of said communities. No man can have claim for somebody else. A migrant can ask for poerkimnssiuon to travel over land somebody else owns, and he can ask to be allowed to stay - and the land owner has any right yone could imagine to say Yes or No, freely. Only this way it can work. Everything else is enforced colonization and land-taking-by-force.



The Dalai Lama, certainly not suspicious to be a warmonger or racist or xenophobe, some months ago said that the Europeans should not act stupid while being helpful: that they should strictly differ between migrants and de factor war refugees indeed, and that war refugees have no claim whatever to be allowed to stay for the rest of their life: that they must return for sure once the war in their home country is over. He also said that migrants must ask, but have no right to demand. That is the original meaning of asylum: it means not constant residence, which would be either migration or colonization (depending on the willingness of the newcomers to either integrate, or not to integrate but expecting that the new country has to adapt to them instead), but asylum means being given shelter only for as long as the war situation lasts. He also said that instead they should be trained and educated while they stay temporarily, and then be send back: so that they can help to rebuild their countries that without their citizens returning and helping never woukd get rebvuld at all: becasue nobody would be there doing it. Or is that somethign that the Germans also should do, during summer holidays, maybe?



Needless to say, there are no coinvincing mechanisms in place that regulate the moving baclk fo for exmaple Syrian migrnats and refugees to Syria once he war there indeed has toned down. And Assad said that he does not want certain people back.



When you help somebody on the street who broke down, and you give first aid and medical help and call an ambulance, he has no claim that from now on you have to care for him and service him for the rest of his life. When a stranger knocks on your door and demands to live in one of your rooms from now on, forever, he has no moral or legal basis to demand that, you can and probbaly should give him the boot. When you share your cart with somebody and let hiom drive with yoiu on the seat besiode you, he does not beome co-owner of your car. He is a guest only - and you have all right there is to expect to leave again sooner or later.



Giving exotic strangers all for nothing all citizen rights and material benefits and allow them in while they have no claim at all for this our land which was made what it is by OUR hands work and that of our forefathers, while these newcomers had nothing to do with it, and if you enforce that upon the native population, you commit a crime against most profound human rights: that of owning private property, also the right to form communities with your likes thjat are not necessarily open to each and everybody. From this right for private property comes the right of a people to own the land it lives on, and worked on and with it. The act of work makes an unclaimed habitat or piece of natrure "your land". But for lefties, this idea that nobody owns anything but everybody owns everybody else, probably holds a strong attraction.


You see the assumed nobleness in the stranger, and you give your own people the boot. Nice guy. But many of these people are neither refugees, nor are they any more noble than we are. In fact, many of them are anything but noble, but are barbarian, primitive, are infested with racist ideas due to their socialisation, and hostility towards women, Jews, Christians, homosexuals, and they despise and always will despise the values that our own - ours, not theirs! - culture here in the west were build on. Many of them do not come to contribute, to fit in, to integrate, but come with the intention to explicitly abuse our studpity, and to reject any integration effort by themselves, while seeing us as prey, and expecting us to integrate to them.



Oh you lefties. You financially live by the national conception of our wellfare states that you try to deconstruct so mercilessly, and want the pearls that allow you your luxurious living to be thrown before the swines instead. The darkest dirthole on the dark side of the moon is more precious and noble in your eyes, than your own people and home nation, and not one evil in the world for which you do not declare the white man to be responsible for. Its all our fault. Always. Forever.



Boring I am, you say? Your really have no idea how boring you underhanded lefties have become for sure meanwhile, eh?



No wonder that so-called populists, may they be real populists or just claimed ones, get voted everywhere around. They are YOUR creation, dear lefties. Because they promise to be the only chance to ever get rid of YOU. I think you have nothing learned from the past couple of years. Socialism is not the solution: beside monopolism, its one of the two root deseases.



---


And here I offer you once again a deal, a thought experiment that I offered you before already, months ago:



You gave no reply back then. Here is my deal: I am ready to accept as many migrants into germany as there are self-sustaining, German/native households that:


1. completely voluntarily accept to house one migrant per household;

2. that finance themselves completely and are sel.fsustaining, and do not live on state wellfare and would not fall into wellfare if they take one migrant;
3. and that sign an affidavit of support (= rechtlich bindende Bürgschaft) and accept to be held fully responsible for any failures, costs, crimes committed, problems, arising from the migrant they house. The household owners will be held fully responsible for all costs and legal troubles and follow-on consequences. Thats what a "Vollbürgschaft" is about.



Would you accept this? Would you respect the human rights of the Germans and their freedom, and the principle of voluntary solidarity that can but must not be given by the individual household owner who fulfills the three conditions above?



Or would you insist that the state must enforce what people do not want, and must lorry in many more foreigners than the Germans want to house and come up for, just so that you can see your moral worldviews being pushed through, no matter what?


I am a frustrated but still: reasonable man, and my offer is free of any imperialism, paternalism, it respects the rights and the freedoms of the Germans and leaves the chance that migrants - although in finite numbers, can come in, maybe even still in greater numbers than I like. Still you could have this deal with me, easily. Different to you, I respect the individual decision making of the individual person, I only insist that his or her decisions must not be paid for by anyone else than himself, and that he does not cherry-pick or leaves the bills and the responsibility to others who must come up for it. Just those three conditions must be met: and I do not even demand that Muslim migrants, that by definition of what Islam is MUST be against our values, should be excluded. I do not even discriminate between mirgants and refugees. I am willing to let in one migrant per household that fulfills the above three conditions. I only demand that those who arrived since Merkel violated the border in 2015, get calculated into the formula.



I think we both know that this offer, under these conditions that ground on the principles of liberalism (in the European understanding of the term, not the American), the cultural tradition of humanism, and the profound human rights of freedom and owning private property (you see, Germans also have human rights, not just the foreigners coming...) , would not be good enough for you. You would want to enforce much much more, and if this is done by using force against the german people, or the European peoples, by abusing the state's so-called monopole of power, so be it. Tyranny and abuse and manipulation is absolutely okay if it serves the left's worldview. And since the white man is always guilty of anything anyway, and any historically grown feeling of culture and identity that discriminates us from others must be destroyed anyhow, this serves us just right. The left calls this bollocks "justice" and "responsibility".

[skidman]

Yes, for lefties like you everybody opposing the expropriation of German wealth and private property, and opposing the politically correct rejecton of Germans having first right over their own land, is a nationalist and xenophobe. An islamophobe and a paranoid. A Nazi and a racist. A mentally derranged and soul-sick nuthead who must be cured. Or burned, socially assassinated and silenced.

Ah, surely enough by "expropriation" you mean the cum-cum, cum-ex, "double-Irish-with-a-Dutch-sandwich", letterbox company schemes designed by high finance cutthroats to exsanguinate our society and not refugees who make demands on a basic right guarantied by our constitution. Well, we agree on that one. The rest sounds a bit harsh, but if the cap fits, wear it.

[Catfish]

What have humanitarian concerns to do with being a "leftist"?
You give a damn about differences, in your simplistic worldview.

I asked you whether your personal circumstancs are so bad that you really have to suffer right now? Really, do you? Because of the immigrants? Did they take away your private chateau, or your job?

About your questions, though i do not have time nor desire for that, so let me say this in general:

From the people i know there are around 70 percent willing to house, help or promote immigrants, regardless of provenance. They indeed help and keep up for following costs, yes. Though i have not yet seen a a serial killer, rapist or mass murderer among them. They are thankful, modest and would really like to go back when the war in e.g. Syriah stopped.
I am not talking about Turks or Romanians or Polish here, who are almost all here for economical reasons. Often they have jobs that no German would take, voluntarily, from care of the elderly to really hard work.

Those germans helping i mentioned do not get welfare, indeed it is pretty impossible to get it, and let refugees live in your home because you know there are rules.
Do you have a second staircase in case of fire? Is the heating/cooling system guaranteed to work 7/24, are the rooms big enough, ventilation, education, medical assistance within five minutes and so on. Because otherwise you will be denied to let anyone live at your home.

Then the juristic hurdles everywhere, immigrants are not allowed to work for a year here, even if they want and there are enough jobs. They are not allowed to look after jobs or any possibility to not having to sit in one of those wonderful refugee hostels with their luxurious interior decorations. They have to explain why they are here without being able to speak german, so they need a translator. Costs money. Or they have to answer to unreadable juristical documents demanding something of them a german has difficulties to understand; ofetn this is just fraud to drive them out.

And they pay for living there, make no mistake. If someone moves out of a room in a refugee hostel and fugitives are now 3 instead of four in the room, they pay more. There is a whole german industry to enrich itself in this new "industry branch".
Let alone the biggest owner of large estate in germany, Mr. Lindhorst, who makes billions with building refugee hostels and then demanding rent, from the refugees or the state. And they are being built by polish people, b.t.w.

You would be astonished how much germans would indeed help real fugitives in dire need of help against physical harm in their countries, and let them live at their home, and support them.
Every german has his right not to do that, no state nor Merkel enforces him to let fugitives or anyone live in their homes. This is a voluntary, individual decision, but a lot of people indeed help.

I can only judge how it is here in Hannover and outskirts, i guess thing are a bit different in Schwerin, or Mecklenburg-Vorpommern generally, yes. So are a lot of people there just xenophobic right-wing Nazis (i'd say yes, already from 1989), and is there being so the result of immigrants alone?


And i have no problem with driving out criminal immigrants, i just beg to differ how much of those indeed are, without condemning them all.
The problem is the war in Syriah, and we all know or at least guess where the roots are. The countries which are really responsible are far away, but it should be those taking most of the refugees.

I see what you mean and again: no problem with getting out economical refugees, racists, criminals. Tests for immigrants being really threatened for dear life should have been more thorough, agreed.
What i do not like is fearmongering from the likes of Farage, ot the AfD.

[Skybird]

70% of all self-sustaining German private households signing in to my proposed deal ...?

I would not even expect 5%. One in twenty standing by his words, at his own costs and financial sacrifice and at his own legal liability already would be more than I would expect.

Dream on. And dread the day when you wake up. Reality denial only works as long as it works. Until it works no more. Then life starts to turn unpleasant in no time.


P.S.
BTW, most households will not be willing to take a migrant and pay for it (instead of having the state, the public, paying for it via taxes) for a simple reason: they cannot afford it. It starts with student households, leads over pensioneers and mothers living alone and raising a child, and ends with low wage jobbers who already struggle to get over the month. Of the households that are better off indeed, families, couples, singles with higher income, most will not stand by their word if not the public pays for their engagement, but they have to finance it all by themselves. When it is about money, the truth about their noble ambitions comes to light very fast. And demands for being humanitarian here, socially responsible there, are cheap words that go off the lips so easy - if it is somebody else having to pay for your agreement. "The state pays for it?" Not with me. The state pays with what he has plundered from the people. The state pays with my taxes. That has to end. And all this ignores the risk everybody taking a migrant has to face when signing an affidavit of support - anmd would be held accountable for any failures, costs his guest causes, crimes he cimmitts, and costs for deprting them again. We talk about spendings and risks that fast like nothing rehc deep into the five digit range, and higher if things go wrong. A well-situated family father will think twice before risking his family'S wellbeing for nothing but a social lottery that promises to never pay out any wins, but holds only risks.

Extremely well spoken @Catfish!

[Rockstar]

"The countries which are really responsible are far away, but it should be those taking most of the refugees." Oh Germany is just as 'really' responsible as the rest of us. Unfortunately for you refugees can simply walk to Germany whereas they have to Chunnel or fly anywhere else and that costs money. Also too we dont suffer from German guilt. This makes border control easy for us.

Germany delivered nearly 13 million euros in weapons to Syria between 2002 and 2013 - mainly tanks, chemical agents and small arms. In 2014, Germany also delivered 8,000 Heckler & Koch G36 and G3 assault rifles to Peshmerga fighters in Syria. "And now we're surprised that these weapons get used," Grässlin said. "And the people flee the use of these weapons and the dictators, and they end up, absurdly enough, in the country where the weapons were made that were used to repress their people. That's why I say: If you sow war weapons, you reap war refugees."